Re: Another teleconference partial edited transcript

On Sat, Apr 12, 2003 at 02:31:36PM -0400, David Dawes wrote: 
> There are several things I fail to understand, and perhaps you
> could help in clarifying them for me.  These include:
> 
>   - Why all parties interested in the "governance of X" are not invited.
> 
>   - What "governance of X" actually means to you.
> 
>   - Who you expect to endorse and/or comply with your group's
>     determinations regarding the "governance of X".
> 
> Personally, I don't believe that your self-appointed group of vested
> interests has any more legitimacy making determinations regarding
> the "governance of X" than any other group.
> 
> Simply stating that you are doing it doesn't give you any special
> legitimacy and I don't know why you think it should.

I don't think it should. If you want my personal opinion, I think the
people at these meetings are legitimate peers of yours in X
development - Keith, Mark V, Egbert, Jim Gettys, Stuart Anderson,
etc. - and if they want to discuss the issue I think it'd just be
polite/friendly/cooperative/whatever to get on the phone with them.

It's not a matter of legitimacy, forcing, expecting, obligation, or
anything of that nature. They are simply trying to work with you.

A phone conversation would help avoid a lot of these
misinterpretations. That's why it's a good idea.

Havoc